Sonnet 75

This review will be comprised of a direct analysis of the sonnet’s lines followed by an overall interpretation.

One day I wrote her name upon the strand,

But came the waves and washed it away;

Again I wrote it with a second hand,

But came the tide, and made my pains his prey.

“Vain man,” said she, “that dost in vain assay

A mortal thing so to immortalize!

For I myself shall like to this decay,

And eke my name be wiped out likewise.”

“Not so,” quod I, “let baser things devise

To die in dust, but you shall live by fame:

My verse your virtues rare shall eternize,

And in the heavens write your glorious name;

Where, whenas death shall all the world subdue,

Our love shall live, and later life renew.”

*

One day I wrote her name upon the strand,

But came the waves and washed it away;

The first two lines create a setting for which the rest of the sonnet revolves around, centered on the subject “strand” (beach) and action “waves.” These two symbols are commonly interpreted as “memories” and “the passing of time,” which I myself am inclined to believe.

In the first line, “One day” shows that the action following is casual in relation to time, or that the action itself could be performed “any day.” The irony here is that even though the general theme of the sonnet is time, the first two words already dispute its importance in the action. This, however, is strongly connected to the deeper theme of the sonnet.

The second line shows conflict between the positive action (writing the name) and the negative action (the waves). This conflict demonstrates weakness on the part of the writer (in the sonnet, not Spenser), who cannot oppose the negative action and loses the name.

Again I wrote it with a second hand,

In this line comes what can be considered a “counterattack” by the writer against the negative action, executed with a “second hand.” Despite the general interpretation of this phrase as “handwriting,” I believe that here the word “second” holds symbolical significance. As a procession of “first,” it indicates that there is now numerical significance in the action that is being performed. By adding this, the earlier phrase “One day” is contradicted and overruled with a powerful emphasis on the succession of time. Now, instead of “any day is fine,” there is uniformity and intent in the conscious action and a “here and now” takes effect. This may show desperation on the part of the writer, who is determined to etch the “name” into his “memories.”

Another point to note is the word “Again,” which I will touch upon later.

But came the tide, and made my pains his prey.

Despite the determination of the writer, the negative action once again overwhelms the positive action. This conflict, however, is now of a different nature due to the changes that have occurred on both sides. The change in the positive action is explained in the earlier paragraph, with the writer’s determination/desperation. The change in the negative action is a parallel enhancement of two factors.

1. The word “waves” has now been changed to “tides.” This has strong significance both to the power and extent of which the negative action is comprised of. While a “wave” is something that can happen erratically and without major impact, a “tide” is a force of nature that can be considered unavoidable and devastating. As tides themselves are created in physical reality by the attraction of the sun and the moon in relation to earth, it can be concluded that the negative action is created by an all-powerful and external force, which most likely represents the process of growing old in the physical world (thus causing the decay of memories). Also, tides are easily predictable and occur periodically, which shows the inevitability of the negative action, as well as the fact that even if the writer knows its coming, he can do nothing to stop it.

2. The tide now has an antagonistic characteristic of “preying” on the pains (desperation) of the writer, which effectively changes its very nature in the sonnet. Before, it was simply a wave that “washed it away,” which can be considered a passive action that occurs without the actual intent to erase the name. Now, however, the negative action takes an aggressive role as an active opposing force to the positive action. This is most likely a direct response to the change in the positive action, which shows that the personified negative action feels “threatened” by the shift in nature. Rather than the hopelessness that the line seems to convey, this actually shows that the writer is close to achieving his wish.

“Vain man,” said she, “that dost in vain assay

A mortal thing so to immortalize!

In here we see the introduction of a new subject, who is most likely meant by Spenser to be a personification of Elizabeth Boyle. She takes the place of the tide as the negative action (the tide is no longer mentioned in the sonnet) and attacks through dialogue rather than physical conflict. What needs to be made clear is that even though “she” may be “Elizabeth,” she is not the “real” Elizabeth as personified in the poem. Rather, she is what can be considered a figment of the writer’s imagination. The reasoning for this is because the setting of the sonnet is in the “strand” which is the symbolical representation of his memories. As everything around him is simply a part of his mind, it is natural that “she” is also a part of his mind. Thus, she fully represents both the beauty that he wishes to eternalize and the weakness that keeps him from doing so.

The words that she says represent the inner conflict of the writer (in a world that represents an inner conflict) as to whether or not he can succeed in his wish. The eternalizing of “mortal” creations is something that was likely thought of as a ridiculous idea in Spenser’s time (and even now), and can be attributed strongly to “vanity.” The words “dost in vain assay” (try) shows that he believes to an extent that his actions are futile and worthless. Futility, however, is something that is usually not recognized until a large number of unsuccessful tries are attempted. This connects to line three’s use of the word “Again,” showing that this is a process the writer has gone through many times. Thus, everything before this point was an inevitable process that leads to the climax.

For I myself shall like to this decay,

And eke my name be wiped out likewise.”

This is the climax of the sonnet, and is also the boundary that splits it into two parts. Everything before this point is part of the loop that has occurred many times in the writer’s mind, while everything past this point can be considered the final conclusion that he has come to.

The provocation for the climax is the comparison of Elizabeth to the “decay,” and the statement that her name will be erased similar to it. This goes to the principle theory of absolute nullification, or the idea that “everything will eventually be reduced to nothing.” As “nothing” in this case represents non-existence in the sense of “empty” rather than “perfect,” the comparison shows that she herself is equivalent to everything around him, and thus similarly subject to the “decay.” In other words, the beauty that she represents holds no more significance than worthless consideration.  

“Not so,” quod I, “let baser things devise

To die in dust, but you shall live by fame:

Here is shown the breaking of the loop where he comes to the final conclusion. It begins with a denial of the Elizabeth’s words and directly compromises it with the statement that he holds her beauty on a different scale to everything else. “Baser things” may represent the “mortal and vain,” which overrules her earlier statement that his wish was mortal and vain by contrasting it as an opposing subject. The words “live by fame” shows that he intends to have all of his being recognize her, which unravels the effect of the “wave and tide” which erase her name by completely fusing her image into his mind (or her name into the strand). Thus, the name cannot be washed away as doing so would wash him away in the process.

My verse your virtues rare shall eternize,

And in the heavens write your glorious name;

This connects to the initial positive action of writing her name in the strand, which now as he has gained power over the negative action takes the eternalizing of her to the next step. The verse that he writes focuses on “virtues rare,” or “uniqueness,” which suggests that what he inscribes into his memories will be in its purest form. Her name, now instead of just “name,” is given the title “glorious name,” which demonstrates that he has indeed succeeded in his wish to eternalize her true beauty. As the sonnet is based upon his inner self, the phrase “in the heavens” represents “the part of him that resides in the heavens,” which is the spirit. As the spirit is immortal, writing her name into it will make it truly eternal.

Where, whenas death shall all the world subdue,

Our love shall live, and later life renew.”

Though this is the conclusion of the sonnet, it also shows that his love shall continue forever. The first line represents his death in the physical world, where “all the world subdue” means that his world will be erased, subdued by the “tide.” The last line, however, once again shows that he has succeeded in his wish to eternalize her name, and that as it has been inscribed in his spirit their love will continue to exist. The last three words, “later life renew,” show a belief in the writer that he will be reincarnated and reunited with his love.

*

In effect, this sonnet was nothing more than a symbolic representation of the mind of the writer. Were I to directly relate it to Spenser, I would say that it shows how much he loves Elizabeth but is afraid that that love will disappear as time passes. He struggles against this absolute force, trying over and over to make it so that her name will never be forgotten from his mind. The ending of the sonnet shows his conclusion that time will not stand against his love for her, and that she will forever remain in him no matter how much time passes and even past the grave.

I am personally impressed by the sonnet and what it represents, and feel that my general distaste for poems is finally subsiding. I am also surprised at how much symbolism I just got out of 115 words, and have to conclude that I tried way too hard on this.